True Left

Still supporting democracy, leftists?

https://rmx.news/crime/majority-of-europeans-see-illegal-immigration-as-a-top-concern-facing-continent-and-want-to-preserve-christian-culture-poll-finds/

An overwhelming majority of Europeans believe illegal immigration remains a key concern affecting the continent and consider Christian culture and traditions worthy of preservation, polling by a Hungarian think tank has revealed.

According to the 2022 Europe Project poll conducted by the Századvég Foundation based in Budapest, almost four in five respondents (78 percent) are concerned about the continuous influx of illegal immigrants into Europe, while a smaller majority of 56 percent think it’s important to preserve Europe’s Christian heritage.
...
Countries with high levels of concern include those with the most progressive governments, including Sweden (78 percent), Germany (75 percent), France (73 percent), and the Netherlands (68 percent), according to the Századvég survey.

The divergence between progressivism and leftism is now also becoming ever clearer.

Even false leftists understand that moderation is required for a society to function, and that those most in need of moderation are rightists. Excerpt from How Civil Wars Start: And How to Stop Them which discusses social media’s role in increasing civil and global tensions:

It's not likely to be a coincidence that the global shift away from democracy universalism has tracked so closely with the advent of the internet, the introduction of smart phones, and the widespread use of social media. The age of information has opened up unmitigated, unregulated pathways to the spread of misinformation (which is erroneous) and disinformation (which is intentionally misleading). Charlatans, conspiracy theorists, trolls, demagogues, and anti-democratic tribalist agents who had previously been shut out of the media environment -- or at least had great difficulty gaining a mass audience -- suddenly gained traction. As social media penetrated countries and gained a larger share of people's attention, a clear pattern emerged: ethnic factions grew, social divisions widened, resentment at immigrants increased, bullying populists got elected, and violence began to increase. Open, unregulated social media platforms turned out to be the perfect accelerant for the conditions that lead to civil wars.

The author correctly points out that rightists had been mostly shut out of civil discourse until social media gave them a platform, allowing them to spread their message and gather their tribesmen, which in turn has created civil division and unrest. Their solution is the same as ours: moderating rightists. But rather than admitting the only way to moderate rightists is leftist dictatorship, they would rather blame autocrats for the mess democracy created:

Before autocracy came about when military generals launched coups. But now it's being ushered in by the voters themselves.

Leftists must leave democracy in the dustbin of history where it belongs.

https://us.yahoo.com/news/rising-tide-of-immigration-to-europe-pushing-continents-politics-to-the-right-experts-say-004400696.html

“Europe is a very, very wealthy region. If we look at it globally, and particularly the EU, by the end of 2021, for example, less than 10% of the world’s refugees were living in the EU. So if we look at it globally, [taking in more refugees] is very much something that the EU could manage effectively and humanely.”

This is the straightforward truth. If government simply operated according to this accurate information, there would be no problems. Now enter democracy to mess everything up:

However, Anna Knoll, head of migration and mobility at the European Centre for Development Policy Management, is concerned that humanitarian efforts are giving life to right-wing movements across the continent.

“You see countries like Sweden or Italy flipping more to the right side of the political spectrum,” Knoll told Yahoo News. “I think states are realizing they cannot afford having more refugees situated there or more irregular migrants coming in, because it does potentially push the voters more to the right. Obviously we try to balance this — we have principles, we have values and we are also a sanctuary for refugees. But we cannot allow everyone in.”

You could allow everyone in by rejecting democracy. Why does democracy matter more than helping refugees? More fundamentally, why should unethical opinions (no matter how popular) be listened to at all?

“If everything comes together — more migrants, super-high energy prices, inflation hitting the roof — at some point I wonder how much the system can take before people say, ‘No, we don’t want this.’”

If they don't want this, they are also free to emigrate! That is what we should be telling them instead of capitulating to them! But False Leftists will never reach this obvious conclusion so long as they refuse to question democracy itself.

This is the kind of result that democracy was designed to deliver:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIgjB8_Tubk

A leftist mayor openly states that democracy impedes ethical decisionmaking:

https://rmx.news/article/mayor-pushes-great-replacement-project-in-rural-france-despite-citizen-protests-refuses-to-hold-citizen-referendum-on-accepting-migrant-families/

A project designed to move 70 migrants and their families to the small rural French town of Callac is being fought by local residents. Despite calls for a referendum on the issue, the mayor refuses to hold such a referendum, conceding he would lose the vote if it were to take place.

During rival protests on Sept. 17, Callac Mayor Jean-Yves Rolland stated that he would address the constituents of Callac with a letter, which was released on Oct. 14. He said the letter would bring “the official version of our project in the face of rumors and misinformation,” the Le Télégramme daily reports.

In the letter, the mayor rejected a referendum. The move comes after Sud Radio reported that one person at a meeting with the mayor, which included 12 other eyewitnesses, heard the mayor admit he would not hold a referendum because some 80 percent of residents are against the measure. He reportedly said: “I would lose it.”

Therefore it should be clear to all who care about ethics that it is democracy which must be scrapped:

In his letter, the mayor instead called for a “citizen governing body” to decide on the arrival of migrants.

“A citizen governance body is being created. This global project must be managed in complete transparency,” writes Rolland, arguing that “the new inhabitants are a chance for Callac, a small aging rural town,” with “many houses that remain empty” and “dozens of positions that remain to be filled.”

Democracy means listening to majority demos opinion like this:

protesters held up signs against the “African repopulation of our cities”

Mayor Rolland gets it. Why do so many leftists not yet get it?

Still supporting democracy, leftists?

https://rmx.news/article/80-of-french-people-believe-anti-white-racism-exists/

80% of French people believe anti-White racism exists
...
Only 19 percent of French people said “no” to the question, while 1 percent could not decide.
...
The CSA survey also broke down answers based on gender, and there was no clear difference between male and females in this regard, with 82 percent of men saying anti-White racism exists and 79 percent of females. The “yes” vote also won in nearly all age groups; however, those between 50 and 64 were most likely to say “yes” to the question (90 percent). The only age group where “yes” did not win was 18 to 24, where 51 percent said anti-White racism did not exist.

The polling did show political differences between respondents, with 100 percent of voters of the Reconquest party saying anti-White racism existed in France, while for the National Rally, it was 92 percent, and in the Republicans party, it was 89 percent.

Interestingly, supporters of the Renassance party of French President Emmanuel Macron, known for his support of liberal immigration policies, also showed that 83 percent believe anti-White racism exists, while in the left-wing La France Insoumise, only 39 percent agreed with this assertion.

For reference:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/old-content/msg6514/#msg6514

"why the "whites" in America whose bloodlines are like that considered as "civilized"?"

In the Western perspective, "civilized' means Homo Hubris:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/homo-hubris/

or as our enemy Duchesne likes to say, Faustian:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/homo-hubris/msg14444/#msg14444

Grant promotes Homo-Hubris/Faustian-compatible bloodlines.

We are here to change the definition of "civilized" to mean Ahimsa-adherent. Of course a civilized person by our definition will not be popular, because most people initiate violence but do not want to face retaliatory violence. Therefore democracy is opposed to our definition of civilization.

The false-leftist today want democracy and liberalism because it prevent more intolerant people whose their action resulting more wars, unrest, and bloodsheds. So democracy will control the people from doing that thing. What about that?

Today's liberalism from 2000s until today resulting less-wars than the Cold War bipolar politics era for example